No abstract

One in 20 people responding to this survey reported lasting bad effects from psychological treatment. Clinicians should discuss the potential for both the positive and negative effects of therapy before it starts.

Reviews of the association between psychotic disorder, the metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and antipsychotic drugs conclude that there is a need for active, routine physical health screening of patients' prescribed antipsychotic drugs. From published guidelines, we derived the audit standard that all such patients should, as a minimum, have their blood pressure, body mass index (BMI) (or other measure of obesity such as waist circumference), blood glucose (or HbA 1c ), and plasma lipids measured at least once a year. We conducted an audit of the clinical records of 1966 eligible patients under the care of 48 multidisciplinary, assertive outreach clinical teams in 21 mental health services across the United Kingdom. This revealed a recorded measurement within the previous year for blood pressure in 26% of the patients, obesity in 17%, blood glucose (or HbA 1c ) in 28% and plasma lipids in 22%, with all 4 measures documented in 11%. In the total national sample, 6% had a documented diagnosis of diabetes, 6% hypertension, and 6% dyslipidemia. Extrapolating from the prevalence of these disorders in similar populations suggests that for every patient with a known diagnosis of diabetes, another had not been recognized, for every known case of hypertension, 4 had been missed, and for every known case of dyslipidemia, 7 had been missed. The responses of the clinical teams to a questionnaire yielded information on obstacles to screening in routine practice, revealing uncertainty about whose responsibility this was, a lack of confidence about the interpretation of abnormal screening results, and limited access to basic equipment.

No abstract

ObjectiveChronic heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HF-REF) represents a major public health issue and is associated with considerable morbidity and mortality. We evaluated the cost-effectiveness of sacubitril/valsartan (formerly LCZ696) compared with an ACE inhibitor (ACEI) (enalapril) in the treatment of HF-REF from the perspective of healthcare providers in the UK, Denmark and Colombia.MethodsA cost-utility analysis was performed based on data from a multinational, Phase III randomised controlled trial. A decision-analytic model was developed based on a series of regression models, which extrapolated health-related quality of life, hospitalisation rates and survival over a lifetime horizon. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).ResultsIn the UK, the cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for sacubitril/valsartan (using cardiovascular mortality) was £17 100 (€20 400) versus enalapril. In Denmark, the ICER for sacubitril/valsartan was Kr 174 000 (€22 600). In Colombia, the ICER was COP$39.5 million (€11 200) per QALY gained. Deterministic sensitivity analysis showed that results were most sensitive to the extrapolation of mortality, duration of treatment effect and time horizon, but were robust to other structural changes, with most scenarios associated with ICERs below the willingness-to-pay threshold for all three country settings. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis suggested the probability that sacubitril/valsartan was cost-effective at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds was 68%–94% in the UK, 84% in Denmark and 95% in Colombia.ConclusionsOur analysis suggests that, in all three countries, sacubitril/valsartan is likely to be cost-effective compared with an ACEI (the current standard of care) in patients with HF-REF.